The Role of Preoperative Chemotherapy in the Management of Synchronous Resectable Colorectal Liver Metastases: A Meta-Analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: The indications of preoperative chemotherapy, for initially resectable synchronous colorectal liver metastases, remain controversial. This meta-analysis aimed to assess the efficacy and safety of preoperative chemotherapy in such patients. Methods: Six retrospective studies were included in the meta-analysis with 1036 patients. Some 554 patients were allocated to the preoperative group, and 482 others were allocated to the surgery group. Results: Major hepatectomy was more common in the preoperative group than in the surgery group (43.1% vs. 28.8%, p < 0.001). Furthermore, the percentage of patients with more than three liver metastases was higher in the preoperative group compared to the surgery group (12.6% vs. 5.4%, p < 0.002). Preoperative chemotherapy showed no statistically significant impact on overall survival. Combined disease free/relapse survival analysis of patients with high disease burden (liver metastases > 3, maximum diameter > 5 cm, clinical risk score ≥ 3) demonstrated that there is a 12% lower risk of recurrence in favor of preoperative chemotherapy. Combined analysis showed a statistically significant (77% higher probability) of postoperative morbidity in patients who received preoperative chemotherapy (p = 0.002). Conclusions: Preoperative chemotherapy should be suggested in patients with high disease burden. The number of cycles of preoperative chemotherapy should be low (3–4) to avoid increased postoperative morbidity. However more prospective studies are needed to clarify the exact role of preoperative chemotherapy in patients with synchronous resectable colorectal liver metastases.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.009 | 0.016 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.009 | 0.030 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".